Logically it could be true to say: "All human beings are mortal (and therefore Peter is mortal because Peter is a human being)."
But the above statement could be false in a sense, because mortality is not the one and only property of a human being. A real-world argumentation could be similar:
"The purpose of this regulation is to improve the privacy of people."
But the purpose of the regulation is not only to improve the privacy of people (it could also be to improve their safety) and therefore the statement is not entirely true.
Or similarly: "The flag of the United States of America is blue." The flag is blue, but that is not the one and only property of the flag.
Is there a name for this kind of "truth" where the criteria is that the statement must capture everything about the object in order to be perceived as true? How could one debate on these premises of argumentation, which are a bit a divergence from common logic?